Thursday, 17 September 2015

Mind control and murder: The climate change denial agenda

The Climate
Study Group is using some pretty weird characters to back up its climate denial
agenda. An
obscure collective of climate change denialists has produced a bizarre research
paper presenting the position that economists might be shrieking hysterics
prone to alarmist conclusions because of their psychological make-up.

And now that
research paper has been sent to Australia’s Office of Prime Minister and
Cabinet in the hope it will influence Australia’s position leading up to the
Paris climate talks.

The Climate
Study Group’s study is entitled ‘Psychology, Behavioural Economists and Climate
Change’. Initially it attracted little attention but then a large excerpt
appeared as a half-page newspaper advertisement on page 5 of the climate
deniers’ bible, The
Australian, last month.

It purports
to demonstrate that the psychology of economists influences their attitude to
climate change and concludes that they are susceptible to biased interpretation
of data and alarmist conclusions.

The research
paper categorically states:

‘The
hypothesis of dangerous global warming caused by human activity has not been
substantiated by evidential science.

‘This paper
has explained how people, despite good intentions, may be influenced by bias.

‘The authors
of this submission recommend the case for reduction in CO2 emissions is not
well founded and certainly no Australian post-2020 emissions reduction target
could be justified.’

The authors,
John Chalmers, Andrew Miller, Richard Morgan, Bob Officer, Mark Rayner, Graham
Sellars-Jones and Tom Quirk, have sent
their paper to the Office of Prime Minister and Cabinet in the lead-up
to the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris starting on November 30.

DeSmog, a
Canadian-based global internet site that ‘clears the PR pollution that clouds
climate science’, rejected the group’s findings, as did the Australian
Psychological Society, a peak body representing psychologists.

The society
accused the little-known group of misusing psychology-based arguments to
‘mislead the public’ on the science of climate change.

DeSmog also
found that Climate Change Group members have ‘links to mining, finance,
agriculture and the free market ‘think tank’, the Institute of Public Affairs’.

The free
market-loving Lavoisier Group, founded in March 2000, has endorsed the report
to cabinet by posting the full text on its website. Other current Lavoisier
contributors are climate denialists Lord Christopher Monckton, former UK
chancellor Nigel Lawson, ex-prime minister John Howard and Des Moore, formerly
of the IPA.

One
particularly worrying aspect of the Climate Study Group’s paper is its reliance
on ‘evidence’ from Dr William Sargant and his book, Battle for the Mind, which
is cited as a source.

Sargant,
1907-1988, was a cruel fanatic who practised psychosurgery, electro-convulsive
therapy, insulin shock and deep-sleep treatment on his unsuspecting patients in
London in the 1960s.

His work was
discredited by fellow psychiatrists and the BBC’s science program Tomorrow’s World, but he
continued to practise in Harley Street and argue for sadistic physical
intervention in the treatment of social disorders.

One of his
patients was actress Celia Imrie, star of Calendar Girls and The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel and
its sequel, who survived his treatment for an eating disorder at South London’s
St Thomas’ Hospital when she was 14.

A worrying aspect of the Climate Study Group’s paper is
its reliance on ‘evidence’ from Dr William Sargant, a cruel fanatic who
practised psycho-surgery, electro-convulsive therapy, insulin shock and deep
sleep treatment on his unsuspecting patients in London in the 1960s. Photo
mindbodydoc.wordpress.com

‘Now, more
than 20 years after his death, Sargant is notorious for his work for MI5 and
the CIA, particularly its covert MK-ULTRA mind-control program. Sargant’s
methods were simple: electric-shock treatment and insulin-induced comas leading
to continuous narcosis, or deep-sleep therapy, complete with tape-recorded
‘brainwashing’ orders being played at the patients from beneath their pillows.
And to think that all this came free on the NHS!’

Sargant’s
Wikipedia entry conceded that ‘his distaste for all forms of psychotherapy and
his reliance on dogma rather than clinical evidence have confirmed his
reputation as a controversial figure whose work is seldom cited in modern
psychiatric texts’.

That may be
so in other countries, but not so in Australia, where the Climate Study Group
is only too willing to quote Sargant’s work approvingly while condemning
American President Barack Obama for making a speech that ‘expressed alarm about
climate change threatening the future outlook for our children and
grandchildren’.

The Climate
Study Group observed tartly: ‘Again, there is a message to cause fear and
anxiety without empirical evidence.’

Sargant’s
foremost Australian disciple was Dr Harry Bailey, who practised deep-sleep
therapy at Chelmsford Hospital, killing an estimated 85 patients. A subsequent
NSW royal commission (1988-1990) resulted in the closure of the hospital and
compensation payments to the survivors. Bailey committed suicide with an
overdose of barbiturates.

The Climate
Study Group may be unaware of Sargant’s background, but, as I found, it is
instantly available with a little research.

We provide a live link to your original material on your site (and
links via social networking services) - which raises your ranking on search
engines and helps spread your info further!

This site is published under Creative Commons (Attribution) CopyRIGHT
(unless an individual article or other item is declared otherwise by the copyright
holder). Reproduction for non-profit use is permitted
& encouraged - if you give attribution to the work & author and include
all links in the original (along with this or a similar notice).

Feel free to make non-commercial hard (printed) or software copies or
mirror sites - you never know how long something will stay glued to the web –
but remember attribution!

If you like what you see, please send a donation (no amount is too
small or too large) or leave a comment – and thanks for reading this far…

Live long and prosper! Together we can create the best of all possible
worlds…

7 comments:

If you ask me, the climate change issue is a classic Bait and Switch campaign engineered by those shadowy figures who control things on this planet. They invented the issue of Climate Change because it suits their purposes, invented fake cures for the issue (like carbon tax) and pigeonholed people into "pro-climate" / "green" mindsets and "climate change denier" mindsets. They most likely accomplished this using HAARP or Chem Trails to create objective changes in the weather patterns while manipulating media sources and public figures and executives. Don't get caught up in the duality! Free energy is out there, suppressed, and can fix issues like this AND Fukishima in a heartbeat. The only reason it hasn't seen the light of day is because it doesn't fit into the plans of those in control. So take control yourself!

I am beginning to doubt the sincerity of this web site. Giving useful info, but with a hidden agenda of diversion.As in the continuance of the Vatican as the main hidden hand. When everyone worth their salt understands the origins of the Jesuits.

Some of us might remember back in the 70's, hearing about an approaching ice age over the northern hemisphere.25 sec. clip of Walter Cronkite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhoB-Vf0N08The public debate about Arctic ice started in the 70’s when climate experts stated their beliefs and/or agenda of a coming ice age. One of those climate experts was IPCC Scientist Stephan Schneider. Schneider not only spoke publicly about what he called “a coming ice age”, he also suggested purposefully melting the planet’s ice sheets to preclude any damage that could result from a coming ice age.

Interestingly enough, close to ten years later, Schnider would completely reverse his stance on “the coming ice age”. Instead, he chose to promote the opposite agenda and lead the charge in attempting to convince the world that the planet was in a period of warming and CO2 was the primary cause. He pointed to the melting ice in the Arctic as proof of global warming.

Why would a scientist dramatically change his position within such a short period of time?The predicted ice melting in the Arctic brings with it many economic and financial, geopolitical and military implications. Therefore, both government and corporate interests have been raging all around this highly consequential issue. As a matter of fact, approximately 13% of the World’s oil reserves and other resources are under the ice in the arctic region.The melting of the Arctic, as stated by various governments, would also create the opening of new shipping lanes in those regions. The opening up of these iced waters would save massive amounts of time, money and fuel for shipping companies, creating opportunities for economic growth. Because of this, there are major plans afoot by all the concerned nations to take control of their piece of the Arctic pie.Like the issue of geoengineering, and despite the overwhelming evidence proving the contrary, scientists have only recently admitted to discussing ways to melt the Arctic and have denied any actual deployment of any of these methods. The following are some of the ways in which scientists have discussed how to melt the Arctic. There is also supporting evidence that strongly indicates some of these methods have already been utilized.Could it be possible, that fossil fuel magnates deliberately publish deliberate clown science, in order to play the fall guy. While reputable science is kept suppressed, therefore manipulating the public to think it is the evil oil corporations fighting the effort to save us from global warming//climate change. Therefore the global warming/climate change agenda must be correct. Meantime, the government does little to reign in big fossil fuel. Could it all be a good cop/bad cop scenario? With the masses, as usual, being the unwitting dupes?

There is great wisdom in doubt. We recall the belief that we are overdue for an ice age quite well. Since that time the electromagnetic mehanisms behind solar activity have become clearer and an impending ice Age even more likely. Nonetheless, people need to realise that they are being lied to by shills employed by Big Oil and King Coal - and that there are a great number of valid reasons for ending fossil fool pollution forthwith.Those who 'disbelieve' in 'climate change' must have buried their heads under a rock. Record storms, earthquake activity, volcanism and other attendant phenomena all attest to the fact that our climate is definitely destabilising. Why is it so hard for people to understand that injecting more energy into our weather systems is stupid and likely to result in catastrophic occurrences? Some recognise that technologies like atmospheric heaters (HAARPs) are capable of this yet fail to make the short leap to understanding that injecting gigatons of certain gases into our tiny atmospheric envelope can also result in catastrophic occurrences.The question is not merely 'are we entering an ice age or are we warming the atmosphere'? The question is 'why are we allowing these moneygrubbing jerks to poison us and destabilise our biosphere.'As for sincerity - you don't think we're PAID to do this, do you? (Unlike ALL the pseudoscientists working for 'think tanks' funded by Big Oil and King Coal, for instance). Try researching most prominent deniers and you'll find they're disreputable dills or worse.

Come on people free your mind! LOL... Everything in society is based on socially accepted agreements, whether the con comes from the Jesuit, the Mossad or the NSA etc... EVERYTHING must be accepted for it to have any relevance in people fantasy minds. Alice's Wonderland does indeed have relevancy because the masses have accepted beliefs that do not have their foundations planted in the real world. Government is simply a tool used to keep beliefs and or values in place even if they don't exist in the real FACT based world, because we accept them as such. The entire riddle of our existence is already known but covered in BS which we're ready to eat, yes we accept the BS for it is what feeds our mindlessness idiocy which magnetizes more of the same. Please sir, may I have some more? Certainly! Here's some more BS Oliver!

And why bother being upset about this and or any other world experiment? We simply cannot blame the oil companies when we ourselves drive cars, and or operate anything that burns Co2 into the atmosphere, can we? Are we hypocritical or what? Global climate change is a fact of life, is it not? Climates change with or without us, for are we not a part of the earth system and doesn't the earth have a built in immune system? Again, if we get too far out of bounds mother earth will simply flick us all off like an annoying little flea. No need to get bent out of shape about being a part of a world system that is perfectly natural in our experiments. Can we harmonize ourselves with mother earth by not not burning toxic gasses, well of course we can. We're just not at that point in our evolution where we can think and act outside of the box of what is killing us, yet! We're not very intelligent. We may need to continue poisoning ourselves until we awaken to the alternative more healthy part of living that's harmonious balance with natures laws. How do we stabilize planetary weather patterns? Well, by learning what it's like to throw things out of balance of course. We're obviously still in our infant stage of evolution, and we may need to destroy ourselves a few thousand times before we awaken to a sane world. Nothing wrong with a few manufactured earthquakes is there? Lets see what happens! LOL, mad world! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N3N1MlvVc4

Learning from mistakes is all very well, but it's pretty retroactive if you don't need to make them - already knowing the truth and living in pointless denial. It isn't a question of blame, but of responsibility. You're absolutely correct when you say that everyone who partakes of toxic technologies and lifestyles are part of the problem, but the GREATEST parts of the problem today are played by polluting corporations and (usually scientifically pig-ignorant) individuals who defend their 'right' to pollute by spreading unfounded nonsense, like claims that pollutant greenhouse gases aren't heating the biosphere, that the Sun is cooling anyway so we don't need to worry about being poisoned, or that greenies are all communists.By all means PLEASE turn on, tune in and OPT OUT of these toxic pseudocivilisations - and don't deny the irreparable harm they do.

There are of course two sides of every coin. I'm getting to the point where I perceive the oil companies as being a simple reflection of who we are collectively. This is just one side of us, and of course there are many more sides of us and many more coins. Perhaps we're in denial of our true natures and the pollution is in our mists to let us know that part of ourselves that we need to accept. Yes, the polarity of our natures is evident, yes? And the coins the oil companies are fighting for, well, I rest my case. We're paying them to pollute ourselves to death because we really know that a coin and it's opposite side is of course more valuable than we are. Rebuttal?

Follow New Illuminati on Twitter

SUBSCRIBE to the NEW ILLUMINATI YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Contact Us

Welcome to the new Enlightenment, an era when suppressed science, hidden history and the enlightening nature of reality are all revealed to those with eyes to see and ears to hear.

These are the thoughts and ideas of New Illuminati - bold forerunners and pioneers of new awareness all over the globe.

Notes on new emerging paradigms from the NEXUS New Times Magazine Founder R. Ayana, who lives in a remote Australian rainforest (and is no longer involved with the magazine) - Catching drops from the deluge in a paper cup since 1984.

§ 107.Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include — (1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

This material is published under Creative Commons Copyright – reproduction for non-profit use is OK. Awesome Inc. theme. Powered by Blogger.

Claimer

All opinions, facts, debates and conjectures xpressed herein are xtrusions of macrocosmic consciousness into your field of awareness. The New Illuminati are not to be held responsible or accountable for flashes of insight, epiphany, curiosity, transformation or enlightenment experienced by any person, human or otherwise.